Abstract
PurposeIn the competitive retailing environment, retailers who provide service experiences that stand out from the competition can gain a competitive advantage. Increasingly, an important aspect of the service experience involves product returns, in particular, the fairness of returns policies and procedures. Previous research studies support that interpersonal justice and informational justice relate positively to consumer attitudes and behaviors. In this paper, the authors examine the relative effects of interpersonal justice and informational justice on return satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth (PWOM) and trust. Additionally, the authors examine the moderating effects of returns process convenience and returns policy restrictiveness as indicators of procedural justice.Design/methodology/approachA scenario-based experiment methodology was used to test the relationships of interest.FindingsResults support that the effects of interpersonal justice on the outcome variables are stronger than the effects of informational justice. There is also support for a moderating effect of returns process convenience on the relationships between interpersonal justice and each outcome variable, as well as partial support for the moderating effect of returns policy restrictiveness on the relationship between interpersonal justice and PWOM.Originality/valueThe research extends previous work on the effects of justice on customer outcomes. Results support the importance of retailers treating customers with fairness during the returns experience and further support the benefits of providing a convenient returns experience.
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,Transportation
Reference59 articles.
1. Assessing impacts of introducing ship-to-store service on sales and returns in omnichannel retailing: a data analytics study;Journal of Operations Management,2018
2. The relationship between justice and attitudes: an examination of justice effects on event and system-related attitudes;Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2007
3. Differentiating the effects of informational and interpersonal justice in co‐worker interactions for task accomplishment;Applied Psychology,2016
4. The role of emotions in marketing;Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,1999
5. Bies, R.J. and Moag, J.F. (1986), “Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness”, in Lewicki, R.J., Sheppard, B.H. and Bazerman, M.H. (Eds), Research on Negotiations in Organizations, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, Vol. 1, pp. 43-55.